Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 5 May 2018 12:36:36 +0200
From: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com>
To: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
Cc: Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...oirfairelinux.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	Kernel Hardening <kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: dsa: drop some VLAs in switch.c

2018-03-13 21:06 GMT+01:00 Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>:
> On 03/13/2018 12:58 PM, Vivien Didelot wrote:
>> Hi Salvatore,
>>
>> Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com> writes:
>>
>>> dsa_switch's num_ports is currently fixed to DSA_MAX_PORTS. So we avoid
>>> 2 VLAs[1] by using DSA_MAX_PORTS instead of ds->num_ports.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/3/7/621
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Salvatore Mesoraca <s.mesoraca16@...il.com>
>>
>> NAK.
>>
>> We are in the process to remove hardcoded limits such as DSA_MAX_PORTS
>> and DSA_MAX_SWITCHES, so we have to stick with ds->num_ports.
>
> Then this means that we need to allocate a bitmap from the heap, which
> sounds a bit superfluous and could theoretically fail... not sure which
> way is better, but bumping the size to DSA_MAX_PORTS definitively does
> help people working on enabling -Wvla.

Hi Florian,

Should I consider this patch still NAKed or not?
Should I resend the patch with some modifications?

Thank you,

Salvatore

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.